Londonderry sends zoning bylaw back to planning commission

LONDONDERRY, Vt. – The Londonderry Board of Selectmen held a public hearing prior to its June 17 meeting to solicit community input on the proposed zoning regulations. City moderator Doug Friant said, “This is your chance to tell us what you don’t like… be specific.”

Zoning Administrator Will Goodwin, who also works in Weston, Landgrove and Peru, was on hand to answer questions and concerns from the audience and help explain the language and regulations. Goodwin explained that the biggest concern at previous meetings was that people were reading the bylaws, which were supposed to be trade regulations, and thinking they applied to residences. “I can’t tell you what’s right for Londonderry,” Goodwin said, “but I can tell you what’s normal.”

The first topic raised was that firewood processing can only be done on weekdays, from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Pamela Spaulding stated that this did not allow people to do woodworking on weekends to supplement their income from their regular jobs. Goodwin explained that these regulations apply to industrial firewood processing companies and “do not apply to home-based businesses.” An individual can share timber on his or her property. A later request was to clarify in the statute that the firewood processing section only applies to “industrial” processing.

Another problem was camping permits and limits on camping duration. A week-long camping trip for a scout troop would be a violation of the regulations. Goodwin explained that this is a regulation that prohibits permanent camping and will comply if it lasts less than 60 days a year.

One resident living in a tiny house was concerned about whether her living situation complied with the regulations. Goodwin recommended having it installed by a professional and removing the wheels, but said that as an existing structure, her tiny home would be regulated under the previous bylaw.

A question was asked about the need to obtain a permit to operate a food truck on any property, even if it is your own. Goodwin explained that requiring a permit for each city is normal zoning law. The same resident also stated that he felt it was unreasonable to say that if a complaint was filed against you, you were “guilty until proven innocent.” He expressed that when there is a simple conflict and a complaint is filed, it seems unwise to pursue one’s case to prove one’s innocence. Goodwin stated that you have the right to appeal your complaint.

Emails and written questions and concerns were also read aloud and answered. One letter addressed outdoor lighting, pool size, number of people allowed on the property, landscaping and garage sales. Goodwin responded that outdoor lighting restrictions apply to new commercial properties. Generally speaking, above-ground pools do not require permits, while above-ground pools do. Public comment mentioned that the bylaw prohibits swimming pools from being placed in the front yard or backyard, and Goodwin said he sees the possibility of changing that. Yard sales are limited to three consecutive days to avoid constant yard sales. Goodwin said planting and landscaping issues should be considered on a case-by-case basis and he doesn’t believe there are any regulations limiting the number of vehicles allowed on the property.

Goodwin said everything in the bylaw is intended for new companies and structures, pointing out that anything that exists will likely be covered under the previous bylaw. He further explained that grandfathering involves land or property, not ownership, so the same guidelines apply when selling or inheriting a home. However, companies would be subject to restrictions in this process.

The storage of materials is not prohibited, but controlled or limited. Portable structures such as carports, garages, carports and greenhouses cannot be used as permanent structures. Performance standards are a set of rules that prevent excessive noise, pollution, smoke and non-agricultural odors.

After listening to the opinions of everyone present in the room, the management board began to discuss the next steps in this process. Member Jim Flemming said he found the meeting very productive and said, “Will has a lot of material to use and adapt, and we are making progress. It won’t happen overnight.”

Chairman Tom Cavanagh explained that the next steps would be for the selection committee to take action and hold public hearings on each change made. The selection committee would have 150 days to complete the task, which would mean a deadline of October 25. If the regulations are not finalized by then, the matter will go back to the planning commission and any time the commission could have been working on it will be a waste of time. Cavanagh estimated that weekly line-by-line meetings would last four to five hours.

Board member Martha Dale said she liked the feedback they received and was willing to put in the time after so much hard work by the planning committee. She said they can work hard and “try to get there on time… I’m willing to do that… to help our city.”

Member Taylor Prouty added: “I think it’s important for us as a board to represent all of you on the issues that you’ve expressed to us and make it not feel like something that’s been imposed on you, but a process in which you participated a part… It will be a long process, but a worthwhile one if we work on it all together.”

An alternative step is to reject the bylaw as is and send it back to the planning commission for amendments based on comments received. Cavanagh said they would have an advantage in the process. “I have nine pages of concerns and questions,” he said. “I think it would be hard for me to do it in 150 days.”

It was made clear that the planning commission would have no time limits on the process. While drafting, they would also work on existing regulations. If the selection board were to take over the process, the planning commission would have to apply the old and new bylaws to every new permit application, which would likely cause delays in many permits.

Goodwin stated, “I think any process can work, but the clock is ticking on the selection board.”

The public expressed that they thought it would be best to send it back to the planning commission due to time constraints and because of the ease of having one set of bylaws throughout the process until new bylaws are adopted.

Dale expressed concern that once the regulations are sent back, they disappear and we go back to the old regulations. “My recommendation would be to pause and deliberately take no action” so Goodwin can go back to the drawing board.

Cavanagh said he heard what the public wanted. Cavanagh decided to reject the bylaw and send it back to the planning committee. Flemming supported this motion. Prouty agreed to the benefit while Dale was against it. The motion to reject the regulations was accepted with applause from the audience.

The Londonderry Selectboard meets on the first and third Monday at 6:00 p.m